[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 4, Issue 3 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Summer 2019) ::
J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci 2019, 4(3): 1-4 Back to browse issues page
Bacterial Accumulation on Triclosan-Coated and Silk Sutures After Dental Implant Surgery
A Etemadi1, T Bitaraf2, A Amini3, M Goudarzi4, N Nadafpour * 5
1- Assistant professor, Periodontology Dept, Dental Faculty, Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Assistant professor, Dental Implant Research Center, Dental Faculty, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Dentist, Tehran, Iran
4- Dentist, Dentist
5- Assistant professor, Periodontology Dept, Dental Faculty, Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , Nima.na04@gmail.com
Abstract:   (212 Views)
Background and Aim: The risk of surgical site infection may depend on bacterial attachment and physical and chemical properties of suture materials. This study aimed to evaluate bacterial accumulation on triclosan-coated (Vicryl Plus) and silk sutures placed at different distances from Vicryl Plus after dental implant surgery.
Materials and Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 20 patients who required dental implants were included. Their surgical sites were large enough to include at least four sutures. The surgical site was sutured first with Vicryl Plus and then with three silk sutures placed at 3, 6, and 9 mm distances from Vicryl Plus. Sutures were removed 7 days after surgery, and the samples were placed in microbiological cultures specific to Enterococci and Escherichia coli (E. coli). Subsequently, the numbers of colony-forming units (CFUs) and bacterial growth rates were evaluated. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis.
Results: There were no significant differences in the number of CFUs and growth rates of microorganisms isolated from triclosan-coated and silk sutures 7 days postoperatively (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Triclosan-coated sutures have no benefits over silk sutures placed at different distances from Vicryl Plus.
Keywords: Sutures, Surgical Wound Infection, Bacterial Adhesion, Polyglactin 910/pharmacology, Triclosan/pharmacology, Dental Implant
Full-Text [PDF 231 kb]   (69 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (48 Views)  
Type of Study: Original article | Subject: Periodontology
* Corresponding Author Address: Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
References
1. Asher R, Chacartchi T, Tandlich M, Shapira L, Polak D. Microbial accumulation on different suture materials following oral surgery: a randomized controlled study. Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Feb;23(2):559-565. [DOI:10.1007/s00784-018-2476-0] [PMID]
2. Brandt MT, Jenkins WS. Suturing principles for the dentoalveolar surgeon. Dent Clin North Am. 2012 Jan;56(1):281-303, xi. [DOI:10.1016/j.cden.2011.08.004] [PMID]
3. Sala-Pérez S, López-Ramírez M, Quinteros-Borgarello M, Valmaseda-Castellón E, Gay-Escoda C. Antibacterial suture vs silk for the surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. A randomized clinical study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2016 Jan 1;21(1):e95-102. [DOI:10.4317/medoral.20721] [PMID] [PMCID]
4. Heaven CJ, Davison CR, Cockcroft PM. Bacterial contamination of nylon corneal sutures. Eye (Lond). 1995;9 (Pt 1):116-8. [DOI:10.1038/eye.1995.18] [PMID]
5. Otten JE, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Jahnke H, Pelz K. Bacterial colonization on different suture materials--a potential risk for intraoral dentoalveolar surgery. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2005 Jul;74(1):627-35. [DOI:10.1002/jbm.b.30250] [PMID]
6. Minozzi F, Bollero P, Unfer V, Dolci A, Galli M. The sutures in dentistry. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2009 May-Jun;13(3):217-26.
7. Banche G, Roana J, Mandras N, Amasio M, Gallesio C, Allizond V, et al. Microbial adherence on various intraoral suture materials in patients undergoing dental surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007 Aug;65(8):1503-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2006.10.066] [PMID]
8. Leknes KN, Røynstrand IT, Selvig KA. Human gingival tissue reactions to silk and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene sutures. J Periodontol. 2005 Jan;76(1):34-42. [DOI:10.1902/jop.2005.76.1.34] [PMID]
9. Pelz K, Tödtmann N, Otten JE. Comparison of antibacterial-coated and non-coated suture material in intraoral surgery by isolation of adherent bacteria. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2015;22(3):551-5. [DOI:10.5604/12321966.1167733] [PMID]
10. Pons-Vicente O, López-Jiménez L, Sánchez-Garcés MA, Sala-Pérez S, Gay-Escoda C. A comparative study between two different suture materials in oral implantology. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Mar;22(3):282-8. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01993.x] [PMID]
11. Ford HR, Jones P, Gaines B, Reblock K, Simpkins DL. Intraoperative handling and wound healing: controlled clinical trial comparing coated VICRYL plus antibacterial suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan) with coated VICRYL suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture). Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2005 Fall;6(3):313-21. [DOI:10.1089/sur.2005.6.313] [PMID]
12. Pratten J, Nazhat SN, Blaker JJ, Boccaccini AR. In vitro attachment of Staphylococcus epidermidis to surgical sutures with and without Ag-containing bioactive glass coating. J Biomater Appl. 2004 Jul;19(1):47-57. [DOI:10.1177/0885328204043200] [PMID]
13. Bojar W, Kazmierka K, Szalwinski M, Zareba T. Triclosan-coated sutures in oral surgery. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2009;18(4):401-5.
14. Sethi KS, Karde PA, Joshi CP. Comparative evaluation of sutures coated with triclosan and chlorhexidine for oral biofilm inhibition potential and antimicrobial activity against periodontal pathogens: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2016 Sep-Oct;27(5):535-539. [DOI:10.4103/0970-9290.195644] [PMID]
15. Matalon S, Kozlovsky A, Kfir A, Levartovsky S, Mazor Y, Slutzky H. The effect of commonly used sutures on inflammation inducing pathogens - an in vitro study.
16. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2013 Oct;41(7):593-7.
17. Edmiston CE, Seabrook GR, Goheen MP, Krepel CJ, Johnson CP, Lewis BD, et al. Bacterial adherence to surgical sutures: can antibacterial-coated sutures reduce the risk of microbial contamination? J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Oct;203(4):481-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.06.026] [PMID]
18. Masini BD, Stinner DJ, Waterman SM, Wenke JC. Bacterial adherence to suture materials. J Surg Educ. 2011 Mar-Apr;68(2):101-4. [DOI:10.1016/j.jsurg.2010.09.015] [PMID]
19. Pelz K, Tödtmann N, Otten JE. Comparison of antibacterial-coated and non-coated suture material in intraoral surgery by isolation of adherent bacteria. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2015;22(3):551-5. [DOI:10.5604/12321966.1167733] [PMID]
20. Deliaert AE, Van den Kerckhove E, Tuinder S, Fieuws S, Sawor JH, Meesters-Caberg MA, et al. The effect of triclosan-coated sutures in wound healing. A double blind randomised prospective pilot study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009 Jun;62(6):771-3. [DOI:10.1016/j.bjps.2007.10.075] [PMID]
21. Venema S, Abbas F, van de Belt-Gritter B, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ, van Hoogmoed CG. In vitro oral biofilm formation on triclosan-coated sutures in the absence and presence of additional antiplaque treatment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Apr;69(4):980-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2010.02.030] [PMID]
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Etemadi A, Bitaraf T, Amini A, Goudarzi M, Nadafpour N. Bacterial Accumulation on Triclosan-Coated and Silk Sutures After Dental Implant Surgery. J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci. 2019; 4 (3) :1-4
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-248-en.html


Volume 4, Issue 3 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Summer 2019) Back to browse issues page
Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 31 queries by YEKTAWEB 4030